[Pearls Before Swine]

Your thinking is a bit backward from the logic applied. The argument is that the draft is used, first and foremost, to fill the combat arms roles required in a major war. Therefore, if one is ineligible to the combat arms, one is not required to be in the draft.

Is my thinking really that backward? In today's military, what is the ratio of supporting to combat roles? I think it's pretty significant, and good deal higher than one to one. In a situation where there was a general draft, there would be plenty of danger to go around, and not just for combat volunteers.

I agree that many military volunteers do consider combat to be a job they want, but I'd submit that in a mobilization, many draftees would prefer not to get that job.

[MortMan]

The logic used to determine the prior lawsuit, as I understand it, was opposite to your line of thought. Perhaps the thought has to be modified, but if a draft is required, then the support to combat ratio changes from the volunteer force.